Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Buy and Sell Signals, and Other Market Perspectives -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: golfer72 who wrote (36952)	8/26/2012 1:21:49 PM
From: FCom777	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218566

I can appreciate your desire to have term limits but I'm not so sure it addresses the issue that you're likely trying to influence. Is it fair to say that you are concerned about the corruption and the ability of many termed representatives to really rape the system via the Committee Rules process and their established "friends" list? Not sure that is a fair characterization of the issue term limits is supposed to address - if not - what is? To me, it seems like 99% of the corruption is tied to the tax system and ability for senators/reps to write in tax breaks for those grease their palms with a "donation". That's the problem. I really like the idea to entirely eliminate the income tax code and replace it with a sales/VAT tax alternative. That would help - but I suppose that the specific rules associated with how a sales/vat tax got implemented would be the next source for "donations" and corruption. The Fed has to go and the Banksters be booted from influence. That's the price for being too greedy. Put em in hand cuffs in a house they belong. What is the core issue? Maybe its the corporate control over the media outlets and the cost associated with running a campaign that needs to be "fixed". Where do all these millions go that get contributed ? How many media companies control 90% of the market? Think its less than 7 - way too few. Maybe that's what needs to be addressed? Media should be forced to contribute as a certain percentage of free air time to any candidate that satisfies established conditions as part of the cost of doing business. What established conditions there should be I have no idea - but it seems like getting big money out of the political process would help. The problem with term limits is that it also precludes reps with good intentions who are actually trying to advance the cause of the people from moving forward. What makes you think that limiting to one term would help. Might that make an elected rep to think he only had one term to plunder the system before he had to leave? The prospect of re-election theoretically makes the rep accountable to the people and is suppose to encourage them to pursue the peoples interests so they can stay there. Not sure this is bad. For those of you that made it this far through this wind bag post - looks to me like we may get that 20 point + S&P exhaustion move higher which could mark the top for the next big down move. Based on a 1410 Friday close - that puts us in the same 1430 to 1440 range earlier looked for. Think that would work quite well ...

To: golfer72 who wrote (36952)	8/26/2012 8:39:33 PM
From: Wayners	Respond to of 218566

Exactly. We need public servants not career politicians. It's a job, a subserviant job to the people. It is not a popularity contest, it is not supposed to be glamorous, you are not supposed to get perks, you are not supposed to be able to profit from it. This is public service. I never saw George Washington get rich off of being President through influence peddling or racketerring or insider trading. We overrun by leftist and nihlist devils.